RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-04392

					COUNSEL:  NONE

					HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reentry (RE) code of 6U (Not selected for retention by the 
Commander) reflected on his NGB Form 22, Report of Separation 
and Record of Service, be changed to allow him to reenter the 
military.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His RE code is based off personal bias and not his work 
performance.  He has dedicated himself to his unit and does not 
believe this RE code is an accurate reflection of his service.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Air National Guard on 
19 Jul 00.

On 5 May 12, the applicant was furnished an honorable discharge, 
with an RE code of 6U, and was credited with 11 years, 9 months, 
and 17 days of inactive service.   

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of 
primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.    


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

NGB/A1PP recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an 
error or an injustice.  In accordance with ANGI 36-2002, 
Enlistment and Reenlistment in the Air National Guard and as a 
Reserve of the Air Force, the applicant was separated after 
being non-selected for reenlistment.  Per contact with the 
applicant’s unit, there were inconsistencies between his 
paperwork and police records.  These inconsistencies required a 
waiver to allow the applicant to reenlist.  He failed to provide 
the documentation for a waiver.  Therefore, the applicant’s 
commander did not consider him for reenlistment and he was 
appropriately discharged.

A complete copy of the NGB/A1PP evaluation is at Exhibit C.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 25 Feb 15, for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit D).  As of this date, no response has been received by 
this office.


THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by 
existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  We took 
notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the 
merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and 
recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility 
(OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion 
the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice.  
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find 
no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and the 
application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of 
newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this 
application.


The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-04392 in Executive Session on 16 Jul 15, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	

The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-04392 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 8 Oct 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, NGB/A1PP, dated 21 Jan 15.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Feb 15.